A major police force has been criticised for permitting a “loophole” that allows transgender people to be strip-searched by someone with a different biological sex.
The warning comes after officers at Leicestershire Police were issued a document titled “Guidance on searching members of the transgender community.”
In correspondence seen exclusively by GB News, Temporary Chief Constable David Sandall said that the mental health welfare of those involved was “at the heart” of the work looking into the regulations.
The note added that the force will follow the National Police Chief Council’s interim guidance on strip searches after a Supreme Court ruling in April said that references to “sex”, “man” and “woman” in the Equality Act refer to biological sex.
The force said that it will allow searches by officers who are not of the same biological sex as the detainee if both parties provide written consent.
It also said that the force will “endeavour to accommodate” situations where transgender people ask to be searched by someone of their “lived gender” in limited exceptions.
Officers were later told that there will not be consequences for anyone who refuses to search someone of a different sex.
A stock image of a female police officer
GETTY
But GB News has heard concerns from activists and police officers that this guidance could lead to some women feeling pressured to conduct strip searches of biological men.
An officer, speaking on condition of anonymity, told GB News that the note only refers personnel to the LGBT+ network for support, which they claim could be hostile to gender critical views.
Gender critical charity and campaign group Sex Matters also told the People's Channel that the guidance facilitated a “loophole” that was a "recipe for pressure and coercion".
Fiona McAnena, director of campaigns at Sex Matters, said: “This is two steps forward and one step back.
A stock image of a police officerGETTY
"It’s great that Leicestershire Police has joined several other forces in reversing policies which allowed some male officers who identified as female to strip-search female suspects.
“But the loophole which allows opposite-sex strip-searching based on 'consent' is a recipe for pressure and coercion of female officers to search men who claim to be women.”
She added: “The chief constable has said there will not be ‘consequences’ for female officers who refuse to search men who identify as female, but will women officers want to put that to the test, working as they do in a police force which was among Stonewall’s top 100 employers list just a few years ago?
"After years of indoctrination that 'trans women are women', it will be hard to refuse.”
A stock image of two police officersGETTY
In a statement, Leicestershire Police Temporary Deputy Chief Constable Michaela Kerr said: “We recognise that there are different and potentially opposing views, perceptions and understanding of the UK Supreme Court ruling within the force and within our local communities.
“The force is following guidance issued by the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) to ensure it is legally compliant.”
A National Police Chiefs’ Council spokesman added: “Those in policing and our communities would benefit from a clear and consistent position across the country in this complex and sensitive area.
“The guidance is explicit that officers will face no career detriment from declining to carry out searches, and any search not conducted in line with biological sex must have the written consent of the detainee, the officer carrying out the search as well as the authorising officer.
“The interim guidance is based on legal advice and has been developed after seeking views across policing as well as those of partners.
"It reflects working practice which already happens every day across policing, where officers and detainees make requests about searches for a multitude of reasons.
“We understand the depth of feeling there is on these issues, both among transgender communities as well as those who hold gender critical views.
"Policing remains committed to treating everyone with fairness, dignity and respect.”